Judge stands by decision in School Board case
Pilot & Today weighing options in lawsuit about secret session audiotapes from Jan. 8
Updated May 4, 2007 at 5:58 a.m.
Breaking News Alerts
Want breaking news from steamboatpilot.com sent to your e-mail or cell phone? It's free and easy to sign up:Steamboat Springs — A judge has affirmed his decision that the Steamboat Springs School Board did not violate the law during a meeting in January, as the Steamboat Pilot & Today alleged.
The newspaper asked visiting Senior Judge Thomas Ossola to reconsider his original ruling in a lawsuit the newspaper filed in February. In a decision issued this week, Ossola did acknowledge that he erred in his original ruling when he ordered the newspaper to pay the School Board's attorney fees. He amended his judgment to lift that requirement. Ossola made his original ruling in March.
"I'm pleased the judge abided by his original decision," School Board President Denise Connelly said. "I think it was fair. We follow state statutes when we go into executive sessions."
Connelly added the newspaper's handling of the lawsuit combined with other recent actions borders on harassment of the school district.
Denver attorney Chris Beall, who is representing the newspaper in the lawsuit, said awarding the attorney fees to the School Board was improper because Ossola determined there was reasonable cause to review tapes of the board's Jan. 8 secret session.
"We brought to his attention several issues we felt he had overlooked, one issue being the attorney fees," Beall said.
The lawsuit focuses on a Jan. 8 meeting at which the School Board entered into executive session to discuss a personnel matter regarding "access to information." Before the session began, school administrators asked that the topic be discussed in public. When the board moved to go into executive session anyway, Board Member Pat Gleason refused to participate, noting the administrators' request.
The newspaper argued the School Board violated the Open Meetings Law by not properly announcing the executive session and asked the School Board to release audiotapes of the session. The School Board denied the newspaper's request for the tapes, arguing it did nothing wrong. The newspaper responded by filing its lawsuit.
The board argued the executive session was about Superintendent Donna Howell, not the administrators, and that her decision to participate in the session was acknowledgement that she knew the session was about her. Following the executive session, the board directed Howell to give board members copies of surveys filled out anonymously by district staff about district administrators.
During a March hearing, Ossola agreed to listen to the tapes. After reviewing them, he ruled that the board did nothing wrong during the executive session. He did not address how the session was announced in either his original ruling or in his reconsideration.
"I'm disappointed that he did not address our contention that the School Board did not properly announce this executive session," said Bryna Larsen, Pilot & Today publisher. "At the heart of the case is our belief that public boards must work to follow the Colorado Open Meetings Law. We're simply asking the School Board to do so and firmly believe they have fallen down on this task."
Connelly criticized the newspaper for its tactics during settlement negotiations. She said the newspaper's lawsuit and open records requests are unnecessarily costing the taxpayers money.
"I think the newspaper's actions are bordering on harassment," she said. "I understand (the newspaper's) need to report the news, and the more exciting the better, but asking the district to pay the paper's $12,000 in legal fees when we won the suit is going overboard."
The newspaper offered to dismiss claims against the School Board in exchange for payment of its attorney's fees and a pledge to be specific in announcing future executive sessions, including a requirement that the board would automatically turn over audiotapes if it did not meet the specificity agreement. The School Board rejected the newspaper's offer.
The newspaper also has req-uested and received all School Board meeting agendas and minutes from the past two years to review how the board typically has announced executive sessions. The newspaper was billed $50 for electronic copies of the minutes and agendas.
The newspaper now has 40 days to appeal Ossola's ruling.
"We still believe strongly in our case and must now decide whether to pursue an appeal," Larsen said. "Once that decision is made, we will announce it."
-To reach Alexis DeLaCruz, call 871-4234 or e-mail adelacruz@steamboatpilot.com
Comments
reallocal 6 years, 1 month ago
Hmmm...give you credit for trying, but still maintaining a poor status quo? And expecting approval? Who else does this remind us of?
reallocal 6 years, 1 month ago
Speaking of nerve, how can Denise say anything about wasting taxpayer dollars with the investigation into the emails continuing? Wonder how much that one's costing us...if the investigation had any merit as a criminal case, the BOE wouldn't have hired their own investigator-it would have been done by the DA. She knows this-her husband's a judge. My guess is that the DA declined to investigate the case BECAUSE IT HAS NO MERIT. I'd rather spend my tax dollars policing the board we elected (sadly) than pursuing yet another personal agenda...
Sunnydays 6 years, 1 month ago
You are so wierd...
JQPUBLIC 6 years, 1 month ago
"The board argued the executive session was about Superintendent Donna Howell, not the administrators, and that her decision to participate in the session was acknowledgement that she knew the session was about her.".... What a bunch of BS... if it was about Howell it should have been stated that way so that she had the right to have it discussed in public view, just because she "participated in the session" does not prove she knew they would be discussing her. This sounds very misleading to me... they entered into executive session to discuss a personnel matter regarding "access to information", what part of "access to information" has anything to do with a personnel matter? I would think a judge would lean a little more toward the sunshine law, not help a political entity hide behind closed doors. You gotta love Connelly stating the paper was bordering on harassment, welcome to life in politics where you are expected to do what you were elected for and do it in public.
linus 6 years, 1 month ago
JQ - You have got to be kidding. You must be meaner than a snake. Connelly IS doing what she was elected for and the judge ruled not once, but TWICE, that the Pilot had no case. Did it ever occur to you that maybe Donna Howell also didn't want a session about her to be public? This IS harassment by the Pilot. What nerve they have to try to get the school district to pay THEIR $12,000 lawyer fee after they lost the case. Not to mention the money we taxpayers had to pay for the school board's lawyer. That money could be spent in my child's school instead of on the Pilot's obsession. WHO CARES about the exact wording they used to announce the executive session? I'm sure the board will be extra careful in the future to get every nitpicky word right to satisfy the sue-happy Pilot. I care a lot more about my tax dollars being wasted on lawsuits. Larsen, Stanford, and Schlict: get out of your 'group think' bubble and get a clue. Face it, YOU have become the bad guys.
Books 6 years, 1 month ago
No question the School Board is being harassed by the newspaper. After winning the lawsuit against Oak Creek, the Pilot was feeling pretty cocky and just itching to fight with the Steamboat Board. It's fun for them, but it's our money they are throwing away. I don't have a problem with the Pilot going after the story, that's what they are supposed to do. They just don't need to do it with a lawsuit. If they wanted to know what was said in those executive sessions all they had to do was ask Pat Gleason. He clearly had no moral compass to prevent him from telling the Pilot what they wanted to know.
Sunnydays 6 years, 1 month ago
This board is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. Did anyone notice how the schools are doing in the CSAPs today?? I missed all the negative comments in that story, I suppose reallocal believes we should have 100% advanced scores, but I also suppose if we did their would be something else to gripe about.
This horrible board is 1.) finally questioning the Superintendent. 2.) Accepting gifts from the education fund board as they are allocated instead of the prior board's "we won't accept the gift even it is given to us" mentality 3. Passed a bond to build a new school and repair a second school. 4. Reached a contract with the teachers that is fair to all parties concerned. etc..., etc...
Apparently, the problem some people have with this board is that it is actually accomplishing things and getting results, instead of accomplishing nothing like the prior boards, who 1.) had blind faith in two superintendents who use administrative team jockying to get their way and who 2.) droan on today with the worn out record mentallity of the past. Democracy has spoken and your worn out ideas were defeated.
reallocal 6 years, 1 month ago
Not really, I am impressed with our kids' performances on the tests. I'm not sure that they are the best way to measure our schools' effectiveness, but good going to all of the teachers and students. I've never criticized the teachers nor the students, but nice try sunny.
Sunspot 6 years, 1 month ago
I wish the Pilot would go after the real story. It appears that these executive sessions are the ones where the board told Donna to figure out who she works for and start doing her job or she would not have one. We can only guess that is what angered Gleason so much that it caused him to get the e-mails and give them to the Pilot. An orchestrated group of hateful letters to the editor, mostly from the old school board, showed up in the newspaper right away. (well one per day) A recall group that was organized several months ago suddenly appears. And we still don't know who ordered the retrieval of the e-mails. Were they looking for just any dirt or did they know to look at Mercer Island? There is a big story here. Where's the Pilot and all their great reporting? They don't need a lawsuit, they just need to look under their noses.
techdubb12 6 years, 1 month ago
Books and Sunspot:
Selective reading? Please RTA.
"When the board moved to go into executive session anyway, Board Member Pat Gleason refused to participate, noting the administrators' request."
Sunnydays 6 years, 1 month ago
Reallocal:
You have to give me credit for trying...
I agree with you on the CSAP's.
Sunnydays 6 years, 1 month ago
First thought that came into my head was you....
reallocal 6 years, 1 month ago
Your personal attacks and defensiveness imply that you have something to be defensive about, sunny...Trying to muck up the issues and divert attention away from the real discussion is a diversionary tactic that really only serves to underscore your ignorance about the real issues here.
Requires free registration
Posting comments requires a free account and verification.
Or login with:
OpenID